OS 9 Server
I was just thinking...uh-oh i know i know
...but wouldn't it have been better, for apple to take Mac OS 9, give it better stability and some other features and use taht as a server?
i mean to my knowledge (which is probably little) u just couldn't hack a mac running well anything up to 9. it just seems that OS X with its unix foundation is more vulnerable
i am away it offers better stability and multi-tasking for server but i dont see that it couldn't be added to 9 with a lot of work haha
...but wouldn't it have been better, for apple to take Mac OS 9, give it better stability and some other features and use taht as a server?
i mean to my knowledge (which is probably little) u just couldn't hack a mac running well anything up to 9. it just seems that OS X with its unix foundation is more vulnerable
i am away it offers better stability and multi-tasking for server but i dont see that it couldn't be added to 9 with a lot of work haha
Comments
Now, I wonder what would have happened if Apple had acquired Be instead of NeXT in 1996...
...though i think NEXT has more technology apple wanted
<strong>i am away it offers better stability and multi-tasking for server but i dont see that it couldn't be added to 9 with a lot of work</strong><hr></blockquote>
That was Copland and Gershwin, and it didn't work.
When Copland/Gershwin went up in smoke that was it Apple was stuck. Apple learned alot about trying too hard for full backward compatibility. Doing so almost destroyed the company.
Here's an article on this:
<a href="http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/201361" target="_blank">http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/201361</a>
[ 01-26-2003: Message edited by: chych ]</p>